How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
A radical ideal in a Noetherian ring is a finite intersection of minimal primes
Statement
Let be a Noetherian commutative ring and let be a radical ideal. Then there exist prime ideals minimal over such that ; when , this means and the empty intersection is . In particular, has only finitely many minimal prime ideals.
The proof uses Noetherian induction and inherits the dependent-choice cost already recorded there; it introduces no further choice principle.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A Noetherian commutative ring and a radical ideal .
Noetherian induction holds for ideals of a Noetherian ring (Noetherian induction: a property that passes to an ideal whenever it holds for every strictly larger ideal holds for every ideal).
If a proper radical ideal is not prime, then every prime minimal over it is minimal over one of two strictly larger ideals or obtained from a factorization with (The Noetherian minimal-prime induction split).
Radicals of products satisfy (The radical of a product of ideals).
Proof
Let be the collection of radical ideals for which there exist finitely many prime ideals minimal over whose intersection equals . By [L1], it is enough to fix a radical ideal and assume that every radical ideal strictly containing lies in .
If , then no prime ideal contains , and the empty intersection is . So in this boundary case.
If is prime, then itself is the unique prime minimal over , so .
Assume now that is neither nor prime. Then is a proper radical ideal, so [L2] applies: choose with , and set and . Because is radical and , both and strictly contain . Hence the induction hypothesis places both and in , and [L2] also says that every prime minimal over is minimal over or over .
Choose finite families of prime ideals minimal over and with and . The product is contained in : expanding gives terms in because and . Therefore by [L3]. The reverse inclusion is immediate, so .
By step 1.4, every prime minimal over belongs to the finite family . Let be the subfamily of inclusion-minimal members. Every element of is a prime ideal minimal over , and every prime in contains some member of because is finite. Removing a prime ideal that contains another one does not change an intersection, so the intersection over is still . Thus .
Steps 1.2, 1.3, and 3.1 establish the induction step promised in step 1.1. Therefore every radical ideal of is an intersection of finitely many prime ideals minimal over it, and in particular has only finitely many minimal prime ideals.
Depends on
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
7 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- M. Hochster, Introduction to Commutative Algebra, Math 614 notes (2020) (standard reference, not scraped)
- J. S. Milne, A Primer of Commutative Algebra, v4.03, §14 The spectrum of a ring (standard reference, not scraped)
- The Stacks Project, Section 10.31: Noetherian rings (standard reference, not scraped)